On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 09:45:54AM +0100, Charles Keepax wrote: > On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 01:26:42PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Wed, 07 Oct 2015, Mark Brown wrote: > > > This all seems pretty much fine to me - the things it is controlling are > > > fairly specific to the way the former Wolfson devices do, they only > > > really make sense with a fairly particular algorithm which isn't widely > > > implemented. > > Is that an Ack? > I am guessing Mark is slightly hesitant to ack as he probably > doesn't want to add reviewing all our jack detection bindings to > his already fairly sizable work load and doing so here likely > means it will be expected in the future. From talking to people at Pretty much (plus generally being busy at ELC-E last week) - if there's specific questions that's one thing but if it's just general requests to look at bindings then it seems like the relevant subsystem maintainers should have the confidence to review straightfoward device properties like this. > LinuxCon it looks like it is pretty unlikely the DT maintainers > will be acking individual bindings as well, basically they are > only really looking at major/framework things and leaving the > rest to subsystem maintainers. > > Given that these patches only touch MFD/Extcon and extcon > is a subsystem designed to handle things like jack detection > isn't it really sufficient that you and Chanwoo have looked this > and are happy with it? Otherwise I really don't see anyway to > move this forward and would appreciate any suggestions? > > Thanks, > Charles >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
